lefteris_kaliamboswikiaorg-20200214-history
NUCLEAR THEORIES
By Prof. L. Kaliambos (Natural Philosopher in New Energy) July 27, 2015 The history of nuclear physics starts with the discovery of radioactivity by Becquerel in 1896. Meanwhile the discovery of the electron by J. J. Thomson (1897) was an indication that the atom of the 19th century was not an “ uncutable” particle, because it had internal structure. Later physicists had also discovered three types of radiation under the so-called mass defect, which they named alpha, beta, and gamma radiation. In 1905, Einstein in his invalid relativity developed the wrong idea of mass–energy equivalence ( E = mc2) because he believed incorrectly that the mass defect turns into energy and is responsible for the nuclear binding energy. In fact, I discovered that in the formation of the simplest structure, the deuteron, an electromagnetic energy of the charge distributions of nucleons which is responsible for the nuclear binding turns into the energy of the emitting photon, while the so-called mass defect turns into the photon mass m = hν/c2. (See my “E = mc2 IS CONFUSING” and my “DISCOVERY OF NUCLEAR FORCE AND STRUCTURE” in my FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICS CONCEPTS). In 1911, Rutherford discovered the nucleus of the atom, in which the atom has a very small, very dense nucleus containing most of its mass, and consisting of heavy positively charged particles with embedded electrons in order to balance out the charge (since the neutron was unknown). The Rutherford model worked quite well until studies of nuclear spin were carried out by Rasetti ( 1929). By 1925 it was known that protons and electrons had a spin of 1/2, and in the Rutherford model of nitrogen-14, 20 of the total 21 nuclear particles should have paired up to cancel each other's spin, and the final odd particle should have left the nucleus with a net spin of 1/2. Rasetti discovered, however, that nitrogen-14 had a spin of 1. In 1932 Chadwick discovered the assumed uncharged neutron which led to the abandonment of natural electromagnetic laws in favor of wrong nuclear theories. In the same year Ivanenko suggested that neutrons were in fact spin 1/2 particles and that the nucleus contained neutrons to explain the mass not due to protons, and that there were no electrons in the nucleus - only protons and neutrons. The neutron spin immediately solved the problem of the spin of nitrogen-14, as the one unpaired proton and one unpaired neutron in this model, each contribute a spin of 1/2 in the same direction, for a final total spin of 1. However the assumed uncharged neutron could not lead to the correct idea of fundamental electromagnetic interactions in the proton –neutron systems. So in the same year Heisenberg had proposed proton-neutron models for the nucleus. Heisenberg's theory for protons and neutrons in the nucleus was the first wrong idea in nuclear theories. Although the Pauli principle is inapplicable in the simplest structure of nuclei, the deuteron, having parallel spin (S=1), Heisenberg influenced by the qualitative approach of the Pauli principle for two electrons of opposite spin (S=0) considered protons and neutrons to be different quantum states of the same particle, by introducing the invalid concept of isospin. Then in 1935 Yukawa proposed incorrectly the second theory of the so-called strong force to explain how the nucleus holds together. In the Yukawa interaction an invalid virtual particle, later called a meson, mediated a force between all nucleons, including protons and neutrons. This force should explain why nuclei did not disintegrate under the influence of proton repulsion, and it also tried to give an explanation of why the attractive strong force had a more limited range than the electromagnetic repulsion between protons. Later, the discovery of the pi meson was assumed incorrectly that it confirmed the Yukawa meson theory. Meanwhile after the same abandonment of natural laws Fermi (1934) in order to explain the phenomena of beta decay introduced the so-called weak interaction according to which an unknown very weak force of very short range governs the phenomena of beta decay. Note that in 1968 Glashow, Salam, and Weinberg influenced by the wrong meson theory suggested incorrectly the unification of the wrong weak interaction with electromagnetism into another hypothetical electroweak force which complicated more the problem. For example in the “Electroweak interaction-WIKIPEDIA” one reads: “ In particle physics, the electroweak interaction is the unified description of two of the four known fundamental interactions of nature: electromagnetism and the weak interaction. Although these two forces appear very different at everyday low energies, the theory models them as two different aspects of the same force. Above the unification energy, on the order of 100 GeV, they would merge into a single electroweak force. Thus, if the universe is hot enough (approximately 1015 K, a temperature exceeded until shortly after the Big Bang), then the electromagnetic force and weak force merge into a combined electroweak force. During the electroweak epoch, the electroweak force separated from the strong force. During the quark epoch, the electroweak force split into the electromagnetic and weak force.” In fact, I showed that the third epoch (1/1036- 1/1012 sec) called Electroweak epoch was based on the wrong Electroweak theory developed by Glashow in the 1960s who tried to unify the false weak force with the real electromagnetic force of natural laws. This theory using the symmetry of mathematics of a gauge theory required the existence of fallacious massless particles but since the wrong weak interaction assumed massive force carriers of short range, Weinberg (1967) using the experiments of high energy accelerators described the predictions of massive particles under the hypothesis of a spontaneous symmetry braking of the fallacious Higgs field.(See my papers CONFUSING CERN RESULTS AND IDEAS and INVALIDITY OF HIGGS BOSON). In fact, under a critical temperature the non oriented spins of quark triads (dud) which give Fm = 0 were changed into partially oriented spins which give Fm and Fe able for the formation of the quark soup. (See my OUR EARLY UNIVERSE). It is of interest to note that the antineutrino absorption is similar to the photon absorption which occurs under weak electromagnetic interactions of the dipole photon charges with the charge (-e) of an electron in the well known ionization energy of hydrogen. In the same way the opposite charges of the antineutrino interact under weak electromagnetic interactions of natural laws with the charge +2e/3 of the up quark and give the down quark and the positron. In the 1970s and 80s, several invalid meson models were developed that went beyond the simple single-particle exchange mechanism. These wrong models included, in particular, the explicit exchange of two pions with all its complications. Well-known models of the latter kind were the Paris (Lacombe et al.,1980) and the Bonn potential (Machleidt et al., 1987). However, with the development of a new fallacious theory (in the 1970s) that the so- called strong interaction is due to a false “color force” of the wrong theory of the quantum chromodynamics (QCD) and not meson theory, all “meson theories” had to be viewed as models, and the attempts to derive a proper theory of the nuclear force had to start all over again. Of course, after the abandonment of the well-established natural laws the problem with a derivation of nuclear forces from QCD was two-fold. First, each nucleon would consist of three quarks such that the system of two nucleons is already a six-body problem. Second, the force between quarks, which was assumed to be created by the exchange of the fallacious massless gluons, had the feature of being very strong at the low energy scale that is characteristic of nuclear physics. This extraordinary strength made it difficult to find “converging” mathematical solutions, because the force of the well-established laws of fundamental charge-charge interactions was replaced by a fallacious force called " Color Force". Under such fallacious ideas in the "Nuclear force-Wikipedia" one reads: “The nuclear force is now understood as a residual effect of the even more powerful strong force, or strong interaction, which is the attractive force that binds particles called quarks together, to form the nucleons themselves. This more powerful force is mediated by particles called gluons, which are a type of gauge boson. Gluons hold quarks together with a force like that of electric charge, but of far greater power. The concept of a nuclear force was first quantitatively constructed in 1934, shortly after the discovery of the neutron revealed that atomic nuclei were made of protons and neutrons, held together by an attractive force. The nuclear force at that time was conceived to be transmitted by particles called mesons, which were predicted in theory before being discovered in 1947. In the 1970s, further understanding revealed these mesons to be combinations of quarks and gluons, transmitted between nucleons that themselves were made of quarks and gluons. This new model allowed the strong forces that held nucleons together, to be felt in neighboring nucleons, as residual strong forces.” Under this physics crisis I was based on the quarks discovered by Gell-Mann and Zweig for the publication of my paper "Nuclear structure is governed by the fundamental laws of electromagnetism" (2003) by analyzing carefully the magnetic moments of nucleons and I found that considerable charge distributions in protons and neutrons due to 9 extra charged quarks in proton and to 12 extra charged quarks in neutron are able to reveal the nuclear force and nuclear structure by reviving the natural laws of electric and magnetic forces acting at a distance. For understanding the strong electromagnetic force due to the extra charged quarks you can see my discovery of the new structure of protons and neutrons given by proton = + 5d + 4u = 288 quarks = mass of 1836.15 electrons neutron = + 4u + 8d = 288 quarks = mass of 1838,68 electrons Whereas the two contradicting theories of mesons and of the Quantum Chromodynamics proposed by Yukawa and Gell-Mann respectively provide fallacious force carriers (mesons) or color forces between false massless gluons which cannot lead to nuclear structure. Although my new discovery of considerable charge distributions in nucleons revealed the nuclear structure by using not the theories but the well-established laws of nature unfortunately these novel ideas met at first much skepticism and occasionally overt resistance. The opposition was very strong when I met privately some theoretical physicists of nuclear physics at the Aristotelian University for explaining the real nuclear force and the nuclear structure based not on the invalid theories of relativity and of the wrong Standard Model but on natural laws of electric and magnetic forces acting at a distance. Unfortunately it seems to be not surprising, because in the history of physics one sees that new fundamental physics concepts many times found invariably difficulties in being accepted by the majority, no matter how well formulated and important they could be. While the ruling of the majorities is a fundamental feature of every democracy, it does not apply to science where the great steps forward have always been made by isolated individuals. This dogmatic hardening under the influence of Maxwell’s fields Einstein’s relativity and the fallacious theories of the Standard Model risks today to make the scientific majorities impenetrable to a critical understanding of my developed FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICS CONCEPTS based on the well-established laws of nature. INVALID NUCLEAR MODELS OF NUCLEAR STRUCTURE After the abandonment of natural laws the first invalid model of nuclear structure was the liquid-drop model, according to which the nucleus has an energy which arises partly from surface tension and partly from electrical repulsion of the protons. Superimposed on this classical picture, however, are quantum-mechanical effects, which could be described using the second invalid model, the so-called nuclear shell model, developed by Maria Goeppert-Mayer and J. Hans D. Jensen because Nuclei with certain numbers of neutrons and protons (the magic numbers 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, 126, ...) are particularly stable like the noble gases of shells in atoms. In fact I discovered that the first magic nucleus of He-4 is a very stable rectangle and belongs to the group of the two-dimensional structures. In this case one observes a radial p-n bond and a very strong axial p-n bond per nucleon, while along the diagonals there exist weak p-p and n-n repulsions because of non oriented spins. Under this condition the He-4 is a very stable nucleus. However Be-8 is a collection of two very stable He-4 packed together for making the first unstable parallelepiped with three p-n bonds per nucleon. Surprisingly in the same group of parallelepipeds the magic nucleus O-16 has two inner squares with two radial p-n bonds and two very strong axial bonds per nucleon which overcome the p-p and n-n repulsions for making a very stable nucleus. It is of interest to note that the heaviest magic nucleus, the Pb-208, belongs to a group of orthorhombic systems in which the core of 82 protons and 82 neutrons makes 48 blank positions for receiving the extra 48 neutrons. Such extra neutrons make extra two or three bonds per nucleon with the protons of the core able to overcome the p-p and n-n repulsions for a very stable magic nucleus.(See my STRUCTURE OF MAGIC NUCLEI). Other more complicated models for the nucleus have also been proposed, such as the interacting boson model, in which pairs of neutrons and protons interact as bosons. Category:Fundamental physics concepts